I don't know exactly what happened, but it sounds like Favreau wanted to work out something to do two projects that would conflict and Marvel wouldn't move their schedule, so now he's directing a flick for Disney.

Sayonara! You can face palm all you want, adding Fury to the whole palladium subplot could have been Favreau's way of trying to make him relevant to the movie beyond Marvel's Avengers agenda. And it still didn't really work.

__________________"I don't give a **** what you say. If I go out there and miss game winners, and people say, 'Kobe choked, or Kobe is seven for whatever in pressure situations,' Well, **** you. Because I don't play for your ******* approval. I play for my own love and enjoyment of the game. And to win. That's what I play for."-Kobe Bryant
"As of right now, I don't know what he do good, cause what may work on another fighter is not gonna work on me." - Floyd Mayweather

Oh no two opinions that were expressed using explanations and reasoning isn't tolerable somehow. Instead of placing an emoticon and internet storming out of the thread you can retort or not write anything at all.

__________________

Quote:

For every man there is a cause which he would proudly die for. Defend the right to have a place for which he can belong to...and every man will fight with his bare hands in desperation...and shed his blood to stem the flood to barricade invasion.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arata 新

I don't like how USA portray Godzilla. Godzilla is a good man and kind man. Why can't Americans see this?

It's Favreau's fault that he didn't know how to go about the Mandarin because in his Ironman movies he wanted to basically ground them in realism,if he hadn't had done that then I don't think that he would have struggled so much about figuring out how create an appropriate movie version of the Mandarin. He should have no one to blame about that but himself.

__________________Before SHH, your miserable, insignificant little life was laughable. Now that you've found SHH, have you noticed you've become more popular? Suddenly EVERYONE wants to hang out with you.

Since Iron Man 2 was one of the top films of the summer and maybe the entire year, I'm glad most of us are ignoring some stuff in some of those articles. Favs staying in the Disney family and still producing Avengers means all this gossip is mostly without merit. Favs has devoted almost 5 years of his life to Iron Man and has to do so under every fanboy scrutiny possible. That doesn't even take in to effect the jealous haters of the world. If he's had enough, that's more then fine. He delivered two great films and moved on.

Sayonara! You can face palm all you want, adding Fury to the whole palladium subplot could have been Favreau's way of trying to make him relevant to the movie beyond Marvel's Avengers agenda. And it still didn't really work.

Adding Fury in the subplot was hardly the problem. It didn't take away from the main plot or anyone else. No one lost screen time or action scenes because Fury showed up for a few brief seconds.

The real problem was the other subplot with Rhodey/War Machine which took away from Whiplash. There is just no defending that.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marvel

Since Iron Man 2 was one of the top films of the summer and maybe the entire year, I'm glad most of us are ignoring some stuff in some of those articles. Favs staying in the Disney family and still producing Avengers means all this gossip is mostly without merit. Favs has devoted almost 5 years of his life to Iron Man and has to do so under every fanboy scrutiny possible. That doesn't even take in to effect the jealous haters of the world. If he's had enough, that's more then fine. He delivered two great films and moved on.

^ You could make the argument then that without studio meddling there's every possibility that he could have found a way for that character to work if he had been left to do his own thing and develop films 2 and 3 more organically. Who's to say he couldn't have figured out the way to crack the character's code had he been granted more freedom. I know from personal experience having to include stuff is always going to screw with you creatively because that great idea you might of had now has to accommodate other aspects you don't necessarily want.

It is possible.

I'm getting the feeling that Marvel's trying to run their film company like a comics company if you think about it and if all these conflicts Marvel have are true.

I think the difference between the two movies is that Obadiah Stane was a much more compelling villian. It's not that Rourkes' Whiplash was bad by any means, but his motivations in the movie were not as interesting as Obadiahs. In the end, he was just another bad guy looking for revenge against the hero. It can be argued that Justin Hammer wasn't really a villain in Iron Man 2.

I disagree with those saying the movie on Tony Stark's end wasn't interesting or having depth. I thought he owned every scene he was in and his story arc was interesting.

Things that I personally would have changed would have been....

-No Black Widow. If they were going to stick with her, they should never have revealed her identity at the donut shop. That was truly pointless and overlooked by most in regards to this scene. The Fury/Stark stuff was brilliant and funny in my opinon. She kind of had no point in that scene.

-A longer fight scene on the racetrack. That scene and build-up was incredible, but the fight was a bit underwhelming once Tony got the suit on.

-Longer final fight with Whiplash, whose armor should have been red and more interesting. Also, it should have been IM vs. Whiplash, not a tag team match. Keep the WM/IM team up against the drones. Also, the 'crossing the streams' angle was used twice in the movie and the finishing blow to Whiplash should have been more original. Again, it was a great scene, but just a bit too short and sweet. The actual fight was one of the best superhero fights put to film.

-Axe the airplane scene with Pepper and Tony. This is the one scene that I thought was boring and out of place with the rest of the movie.

-More Rhodey/Stark and Stark/Whiplash scenes and less Whiplash/Hammer.

Aside from this minor grievances, the movie was wonderful. I can't let these minor things really ruin any movie for me. The good parts of IM2 make up for the lesser parts. Pretty much every scene up until after Stark meets Whiplash in jail was perfect. Same goes with every scene after the Stark/Rhodey fight (which was still entertaining IMO).

I'm getting the feeling that Marvel's trying to run their film company like a comics company if you think about it and if all these conflicts Marvel have are true.

Which would be the most idiotic way to handle a film company given the size of the respective fan bases in relation to the size of the general audience. If that is their strategy then heaven help them because it will come back to bite them in the arse.

Which would be the most idiotic way to handle a film company given the size of the respective fan bases in relation to the size of the general audience. If that is their strategy then heaven help them because it will come back to bite them in the arse.

When you think about it could be true. I don't believe some of these but its interesting to think about:

Not necessarily what the other 90% of cinema goers want or even care about, that's the issue.

There's really no issue except for the few whiners who come on these boards and complain about it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris B

I don't think Nick Fury, Black Widow, or War Machine were responsible for bogging down IM2 myself.

For me, it was the feeling that IM2 lacked the depth the first film had. They just didn't really do any thing to make you invest in Stark's story of dealing with the palladium poisoning.

I think had that whole angle been handled better and had Whiplash been given more to do, I think the film would've easily have been equal to IM1 in terms of quality.

And that's exactly my point about War Machine not needing to be in the movie. Favreau from the very beginning said the movie wasn't going to be longer than the first, so when Howard was fired and then they rewrote the script to beef up Rhodey's screen time and bring in War Machine, guess who got shafted.

Marvel thinks they can run a movie studio the same way that they run their comics. Dumping a director or actor to them is no different than firing a writer or artist from a particular book, because to them it's more important to bombard a book with cross-franchise references and cameos to maintain continuity than it is for the character to look and behave consistently.

Marvel's attitude of the talent being expendable is going to unravel what was originally a very promising start for them. Firing Terrance Howard was a yellow alert. Firing Edward Norton was an orange alert. And now, letting John Fav. walk because he wasn't pliable enough is a freaking red alert.

Marvel's attitude of the talent being expendable is going to unravel what was originally a very promising start for them. Firing Terrance Howard was a yellow alert. Firing Edward Norton was an orange alert. And now, letting John Fav. walk because he wasn't pliable enough is a freaking red alert.

I find this to be partly true. Now, Don't get me wrong, I thought Don Cheadle as Rhodey/War Machine was awesome, but I thought Terrance Howard did a great job as well. When i heard Edward norton was being recast, I really did get psised, but I do hope mark Ruffalo does a great job, and now, Favreau isn't directing IM3, which is still pissing me off. I have faith that the 3rd will be good without Jon, but I would have felt more secure with him directing a 3rd isntallment.

__________________
A Member of Raimi's "Spider-ManTrilogy" Fans|

The Amazing Spider-man (2012) will be literally AMAZING!

A lean, silent figure slowly fades into the gathering darkness, aware at last that in this world, With Great Power There Must Also come Great Responsiblity - Amazing Fantasy #15